Skip to main content

About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
, which is also the problem of pakistan, becomes a regional problem in which the country's in the region have a stake in solving and are not -- there's a reasonable chance that can be pulled off. >> dr. brzezinski, you mentioned pakistan. the focus of policy leaders. turning away from afghanistan, we got reports the journalist who was killed by the isi inside pakistan further out is complicating our relationship with that group. we announced going in to kill osama bin laden. how do we manage this relationship that's been difficult to manage for as far as the eye can see? >> well, first of all, we have to recognize we are dealing here with two sifrl conflicts. one in afghanistan and the one in pakistan. there's a conflict in pakistan. there isn't a foreign intervention trying to resolve it. it is a great internal conflict. what we are seeing in pakistan is a series of contradictory policies, contradictory engagements and contradictory engagements. the army wants to preserve a stable pakistan that is assured of security and sees the united states as a component of the success in that quest
of pakistan that will bring success to local areas. a country from kabul, it will never happen. we are wasting time and money. the fact we are leaving may assist in the development of stability in local areas. they will never be a centrally governed pakistan, i mean afghanistan. afghanistan is not like iraq. give me one more second and i'll tell you what i think is going to happen in iraq. we'll probably go back to having one bloodthirsty tyrant to rule the country. that's the irony of iraq. >> happy days, wes. >> afghanistan is extraordinarily tribal. it's difficult to have a conversation about afghanistan. one story i loved was one of the things we did in afghanistan when i was working with the civil affairs team, giving out flags to children and local leaders. they would look at the flag and say what is this. you would have to explain, it's your country. there's another thing, i think you brought up a good point, joe. afghanistan is not iraq. you are right. there's a crucial player, though that factors in. that's iran. iran is not only very active and involved, but in addition to that, iran
is occurring in yemen? >> pakistan is probably larger than any of them. afghanistan is a distraction. one thing about afghanistan, when you had the attacks on the hotel, it went back to vietnam. it's a reminder the people we are working with in afghanistan, given what they get out of pakistan, they will not be able to turn the corner. we continue to invest enormously there. >> howard dean? >> afghanistan, because of the leadership there, no matter what we do, it doesn't matter. karzai is hopeless. i'm more optimistic. if you look at it over many, many years, tunisia is a bright star. egypt is not going to be a democracy in the way we know it. yemen is a huge problem. libya, who knows. i think there's progress that's been made here. i agree there's a lot of countries not making progress. syria, who knows what's going to happen. there will be real gains. >> i kind of agree with governor dean. in yemen, if we have what you describe, the potential for ungovernable state, it will become a petri dish of groups. they may be highly dysfunctional, but not failed. how does the u.s. not send some kind of
the east to the pakistan border. that's where i spent my time. we're starting to see a lot of the flow from fighters coming from pakistan. >> let me ask you, drawn down 33,000 troops by september of next year, good shape in kandahar and helmand province. how can you maintain momentum and win a war when you're pulling out 1/3 of the best soldiers you've got. >> a couple of things, one, we're having as we had with a bond conference in 2001. what's interesting is as we were talking about troop deployments and actual mission and strategy, we're in the process of escalating the troop numbers. now we're having the reconciliation with the taliban and networks, etc., as we're decelerating. that factors in to the larger conversation. the second thing that's important to remember about the troop assignments is how many will be combat troops or support troops. what are the areas you're going to pen trade in to and hold on to the areas as well. >> "the new york times" reporting this morning that the obama administration officials believe that pakistan's spy agency ordered the killing of a pakistani jou
pakistan, as we said on the show a number of times. how do we deal with pakistan and at the same time, get out of afghanistan except in terms of special forces or drones to represent our interest and chase down terrorists? meanwhile, you have the greatest tender box in the world, to save a nuclear pakistan with more than 100, probably twice as many with nuclear warheads that can fall into the hands of terrorists. >> the bottom line is, how do we deal with it? >> it's always pakistan is a basket case, a nuclear basket case. stay in afghanistan. >> you don't. you don't. >> it's not going to work. that is washington's argument, mike barnicle. pakistan is stabilized. we have to keep having american troops killed in afghanistan. it doesn't add up. invading cambodia is the right move when you are going into vietnam. >> continuing argument and keep making it because less than 1% of american families and american people are serving in the military in afghanistan. >> there you go. >> back to the draft. >> untouched. >> we need a draft. >> we'll come back the dr. aidan quinn. [ male announcer ] memb
.s. troops in afghanistan. this report out of the "new york times" says the aid could resume if pakistan takes tougher action against the taliban as well as al qaeda. meanwhile, defense secretary leon panetta is in afghanistan as i was mentioning. panetta is meeting with american military leaders as well as afghan officials. atia abawi is in kabul, afghanistan. he's making strong remarks when it comes to al qaeda and how he wants to continue stamping them out. >> reporter: good morning, thomas. that's absolutely right. on his flight from d.c. to kabul he did speak to reporter on the plane that he was on about al qaeda and said that the strategic defeat of al qaeda was within reach, pointing to the death of osama bin laden, pointing to the information that we were able to retrieve from his compound, including the names of key leaders that they'd like to go after. and he says that this is the time to go after al qaeda. let's listen to what he had to say. >> now is the moment following what happened with bin laden to put maximum pressure on them. because i do believe that if we continue thi
and flipped, we saw, into becoming an asset for the west. next thing we know, in pakistan helping with bomb strikes. >> his initial reports are accurate? he's talking, as you say, about damage done by the drones. then he sends a piece of video that shows him in the company of a top al qaeda. somebody we've been looking for for a long time, and then the motherload of information. he claims he's now rendered medical services to ayman al zawahiri. correct? >> how clever he was, weaving in between two worlds, the cia and al qaeda and convincing everyone he's on their side. but ultimately, as we discover later, he's actually on al qaeda's side in this elaborate plot, an incredible lure was set up by al qaeda using theirqaeda their own video equipment, their own knowledge of how it works, to create something so attractive that the cia couldn't say no to. >> the reason the cia found it credible through the jordanians is that he knew the medical history of zawahari and now the objective becomes, well, let's bring him in. we americans need to set eyes on him and allow him to lead us to the al qaeda
afghanistan, pakistan. you're reading a couple pieces in the "new york times." now it's spreading to all of these different countries and one that really jumped off the page for me, drone attacks in somalia. >> joining us, jeremy scahill, on the cia secret sites in somalia, jeremy, the secret training programs and secret prisons out of somalia is part of your reporting there. how big a threat are these terrorist group there's? >> we should say first of all president obama campaigned on a promise to go up against these bush era policies declaring war on the world, running secret sites, torturing prisoners. deeply involved in an underground dungeon officially run by the somali national security agency, but their salaries are paid by the cia directly. in fact, one somali agent described thousand hairli ed ho and paid by u.s. agents and the u.s. is interrogating prisoners, including those rendered by the kenyan government, snatched off the streets in nairobi based on u.s. intelligence and taken to this secret prison and interrogated. it goes against the president's ordered he signed in janua
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8